You guys say Im the defendant and you have to prove your case against me,~~( petitioner/plaintiff bears the burden of proof of claim)~~ that’s not the case in tax court because you’re the petitioner. You’re not the defendant. The IRS was working with you on the private side and they tricked you into taking it out of the private side and filing it into tax court.~~[by telling you to take it to tax court if you don’t like the assessment]~~ My mom was a federal agent, a tax auditor from 1972 through the 90s and she taught me everything. She said you’re the one who’s petitioning the tax court. The burden of proof is now on you. The IRS never has the capacity to attach you. Now you’re the prosecutor.You petitioned the court. It’s like watching the old Bible movies, the King David where people are lined up outside his castle waiting to have their case heard. Theyre the petitioners, so the IRS tells you, if you want to challenge our assessment of you, fine you petition the tax court at this address within 30 days or we are going to start doing some really bad things to you. What you should have done is just keep sending letters back and forth to them and say, wait a second, do you have the right to claim that I owe you a debt? Who has that right? I thought you were the IRS. I thought you were a state agency. I’ve heard you only have privileges, duties and obligations. Where do you have a right? You have a right? Show me where you have that right to make a claim against my person or my property. They don’t. They have no rights. No man’s going to come forth. She explained to me very simply, if you assess a man $89,400 in assessments and you hand it to him across the desk and you tell him this is what you owe, and if that man says now put it in writing and sign it and testify to that in open court! She said I would never sign that. I ask why. She said because we all know its fraud. She said but you can fill out the assessment form and throw it across the desk and tell the man you better pay it or else or he’s going to have a really bad life, absolutely. If the man says to my mom ,”now sign it and will you testify to that in open court,” she says of course not. I can’t testify to that. I have no firsthand knowledge of any information on that paper. All I am is a tax auditor for the IRS. I don’t know how much money he really made. My mom said its all fraud. She explained it to me in less than 5 minutes. She said it’s all very simple. I asked then why do people keep paying? She said they are afraid they are going to get into trouble if they don’t. I was paying my taxes, doing that IRS nonsense up until 1988, the same as everybody else is doing because I was afraid. Now I file exempt every year. Just make sure you file exempt every year. File what? File exempt on any kind of paperwork anybody gives you, a W-4 form when you start a job, just write exempt on it. The difference between a complaint and a charge is, when someone [ a ‘judge’ or (administrative hearing officer) perhaps at an arraignment hearing?]~~~wants to charge you with something you ask, ‘judge x,’~~you want to charge me with that criminal complaint? I, a man; can’t accept that charge until I’ve been criminally indicted before a grand jury. I, a man; am not bearing the burden of that charge~~( no agree to contract)~~. You sir hold onto that charge until the jury comes down with an indictment and places the burden of that charge on my shoulders ~~ (not “understanding(standing under) the charge”)~~. Im not accepting that charge at this time.~~ (a choice not to voluntarily contract)~~ I, a man; won’t accept any charges till it comes down from the grand jury. Do you realize that if every man demanded that the grand jury comes down with a felony indictment against a man how clogged up the court system would be? So when the grand jury comes down with an indictment, on a criminal complaint, then you , a man; present your claim to the grand jury. You file a claim with the grand jury the same time. Say to the grand jury, oh good, we’re going to hear this criminal complaint against i, a man;? Good at the same time you are going to hear my claim against them, that the policy enforcers ~~”(interfered with my right)”~~ to travel, or towed my conveyance from the common way or took my pill, or took my bottle and the government agent policy enforcers had no right to take my bottle. I didn’t give them any right to take my bottle. I didn’t give The government agent policy enforcers any administrative capacity over my property. That pill was my property. That joint was my property. They were in my possession under my control. The government agent policy enforcers have no right (to their action). I have rights. The government agent policy enforcers have duties, privileges and obligations. I, a man; have rights. See? It’s just a play on words. that’s all this stuff is all the time, is that common law man has rights and our property can’t be interfered with unless>>> we give another man(The government agent) consent..
Posted on: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 22:19:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015